When I was inducted into the Honor Society in winter 2013, I thought that being on top of my batch will be enough to get me through my journey as a Public Health Ph.D. candidate. Recruiting a dissertation chair is the most challenging so far, especially getting a response from them. What if I do not get a dissertation chair who will be a good match with my dissertation topic? Can I submit my premise and finish my dissertation to another university? A night before my youngest brother passed away; I was on the phone with him. He told me that he is too tired, and I responded that it is okay to let go. He asked me to promise him to go back to school and take on a graduate degree to make a difference. “Promise me that at some point to be involved in a research project that could make a difference to individuals diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.” He passed away in 2007, a few weeks before his 40th birthday, and three months before his only daughter’s first birthday.
Focusing on the impact of cigarette smoking as a factor that promotes pancreatic cancer rather than initiates it will amplify the importance of behavioral change, and enhance the quality of life. The outcome of pancreatic cancer remains dismal, even with treatment combinations of surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy with an estimated annual economic burden of $4.9 billion annually (Pandol, Apte, Wilson, Gukovskaya, and Edderkaoui, 2012). Advances in patient management and understanding the biology of pancreatic cancer has taken substantial progress over the years. Herman, Schulick, Hruban and Goggins (2011) found that screening first-degree relatives of individuals with family members affected by pancreatic cancer can identify non-invasive precursors of the disease. In this 2011 study shows the gradual rise in the incidence and number of deaths caused by pancreatic tumors, even with the decline in incidence and mortality of other common cancers. Furthermore, Vincent et al. found that despite developments in detection and management of pancreatic cancer, only about 4% of patients will live five years after diagnosis. Moreover, Vincent et al. (2011) found that present surgical resectioning offers the only chance of cure and improve the survival rate for those with malignant disease localized to the pancreas. Statistical analysis in 2012 study shows 80–85% of patients with advanced unresectable disease responds poorly to most chemotherapeutic agents. Therefore, it is warranted to have continued understanding of the biological mechanisms contributory to the development and progression of pancreatic tumors. On the other hand, Klein et al. (2004) emphasized the significance of quantification of the risk of individuals with a family history of pancreatic cancer as a rational basis for cancer risk screening and counseling. In a prospective registry-based approach of this 2004 study, the risk of these individuals showed an increased risk of developing the disease. Klein et al. (2004) performed standardized incidence ratios and compared the number of incident pancreatic cancers observed with those expected using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) rates. It was quantified in this registry-based study the pancreatic cancer risk in kindreds with a family member who was diagnosed with the disease, supporting the hypothesis of increased risk in association with family history. While Blackford et al. (2009) failed to identify the signature tobacco-related mutation in cigarette smokers that could have strong implication to the development of pancreatic cancer; this 2009 study found the nonspecific DNA damage caused by tobacco carcinogens. Furthermore, the combined causality of non-tobacco-related mutagenic risk factors such as inherited predisposition to cancer may share mutagenic properties with the tobacco mutagens active in pancreatic tissues (Ding et al., 2008; Prokopczyk et al., 2002). The types and patterns of these mutations provide insight into the mechanisms by which cigarette smoking causes pancreatic cancer (Blackford et al., 2009). Porta et al. (2009) and Blackford et al. (2009) suggested that smoking enhances the risk for pancreatic cancer through mechanisms other than genetic mutation. The development of pancreatic cancer may have a non-significant association to pipe smoking and smokeless tobacco use, but in a large collaborative pooled analysis of non-cigarette tobacco use in 11 studies within the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4) found that cigar smoking is associated with an excess risk of the disease (Bertuccio et al., 2011). Cigarette smoking was found to be an established risk factors— both exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), and active cigarette smoking (Vrieling et al., 2010). Over 40,000 individuals are diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, and less than 5% of patients diagnosed has a survival rate of five years. The component of the smoke of cigarettes that produced in the body as a metabolite of nicotine and the most abundant carcinogens in tobacco smoke is 4-(methyl nitrosamine)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK). Vary widely in nicotine content and carcinogenic nicotine metabolites, cigarettes, cigars, and other tobacco products—nicotine reaches the lungs and is quickly absorbed into the bloodstream during smoking. A cigar containing as many as 20 grams of tobacco can have nicotine between 5.9 and 335.2 mg per gram of tobacco (Henningfield, Fant, Radzius, & Frost, 1999). Prokopczyk et al. (2002) noted that the nicotine levels in pancreatic juice in smokers is seven times higher than non-smokers. Blackford et al. (2009) concluded that smokers diagnosed with pancreatic carcinomas harbors more mutations than the non-smoker, therefore, doubles the risk, accounting for 20 to 25% of pancreatic cancers.
Pandol et al. (2012) stated that the pro-carcinogenic effects of smoking on the pancreas are inadequately studied, confirming that tobacco smoking is the strongest avoidable risk and the major environmental factor for pancreatic cancer. Pandol et al. provided valuable insights into the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer, particularly in the initiation and progression of the disease. Determining the mechanisms underlying the effect of smoking compounds on fibrosis and inflammation will improve our limited knowledge of pancreatic biology. Pancreatic cancer can be classified as genetic, environmental, or both; as well as a disease caused by inherited DNA mutation or mutation by chance. While advances in Genomics gives the promise to early pancreatic cancer detection through better understanding of pancreatic biology, it is paramount to embrace the significance of lifestyle habits that can be modified to evidence-based healthier concepts that translates to reduced cancer risk. Applying lessons learned from the outcome of my proposed study, and existing body of knowledge will prevent the emergence of pancreatic cancer, reduce cancer risk and advance population health. Early behavioral change and interventions will improve the survival rate and quality of life during the time course of pancreatic cancer progression.
Bayraktar, S., Bayraktar, U. D., & Rocha-Lima, C. M. (2010). Recent developments in palliative chemotherapy for locally advanced and metastatic pancreas cancer. World journal of gastroenterology: WJG, 16(6), 673.
Bertuccio, P., La Vecchia, C., Silverman, D. T., Petersen, G. M., Bracci, P. M., Negri, E., … & Boffetta, P. (2011). Cigar and pipe smoking, smokeless tobacco use and pancreatic cancer: an analysis from the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4). Annals of Oncology, mdq613.
Blackford, A., Parmigiani, G., Kensler, T. W., Wolfgang, C., Jones, S., Zhang, X., … & Hruban, R. H. (2009). Genetic mutations associated with cigarette smoking in pancreatic cancer. Cancer research, 69(8), 3681-3688.
Bosetti, C., Lucenteforte, E., Silverman, D. T., Petersen, G., Bracci, P. M., Ji, B. T., … & La Vecchia, C. (2012). Cigarette smoking and pancreatic cancer: an analysis from the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (Panc4). Annals of oncology, 23(7), 1880-1888.
Bouvier, A. M., David, M., Jooste, V., Chauvenet, M., Lepage, C., & Faivre, J. (2010). Rising incidence of pancreatic cancer in France. Pancreas, 39(8), 1243-1246.
Breslow, N. E., Day, N. E., & Davis, W. (1980). The analysis of case-control studies. International Agency for Research on Cancer.
Chowdhury, P., Chang, L. W., & Rayford, P. L. (1993). Tissue distribution of [3H]-nicotine in rats. Biomedical and environmental sciences: BES, 6(1), 59-64.
Chowdhury, P., Doi, R., Tangoku, A., & Rayford, P. L. (1995). Structural and functional changes of rat exocrine pancreas exposed to nicotine. International journal of pancreatology, 18(3), 257-264.
Colby, S. M., Clark, M. A., Rogers, M. L., Ramsey, S., Graham, A. L., Boergers, J., … & Abrams, D. B. (2012). Development and reliability of the lifetime interview on smoking trajectories. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 14(3), 290-298.
Colditz, G. A., Wolin, K. Y., & Gehlert, S. (2012). Applying what we know to accelerate cancer prevention. Science translational medicine, 4(127), 127rv4-127rv4.
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986). Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Controlled clinical trials, 7(3), 177-188.
Ding, L., Getz, G., Wheeler, D. A., Mardis, E. R., McLellan, M. D., Cibulskis, K., … & Sawyer, C. S. (2008). Somatic mutations affect key pathways in lung adenocarcinoma. Nature, 455(7216), 1069-1075. Chicago.
Edderkaoui, M., Park, C., Lee, I., Nitsche, C., Gerloff, A., Grippo, P. J., … & Gukovskaya, A. S. (2011, November). Novel model of pancreatic neoplastic lesions induced by smoking compound NNK. In Pancreas (Vol. 40, No. 8, pp. 1321-1321). 530 WALNUT ST, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106-3621 USA: LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS.
Feuer, E. J., & Wun, L. M. DEVCAN: probability of developing or dying of cancer software, version 4.1.[internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute (NCI); 1999 [accessed 2002 May 28].[1 p].
Gould, G. S., Watt, K., Cadet-James, Y., & Clough, A. R. (2015). Using the risk behaviour diagnosis scale to understand Australian Aboriginal smoking—a cross-sectional validation survey in regional New South Wales. Preventive Medicine Reports, 2, 4-9.
Greenland, S. (1987). Quantitative methods in the review of epidemiologic literature. Epidemiologic reviews, 9(1), 1-30.
Henningfield, J. E., Fant, R. V., Radzius, A., & Frost, S. (1999). Nicotine concentration, smoke pH and whole tobacco aqueous pH of some cigar brands and types popular in the United States. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 1(2), 163-168.
Hoffmann, D., Hoffmann, I., & El-Bayoumy, K. (2001). The less harmful cigarette: a controversial issue. A tribute to Ernst L. Wynder. Chemical research in toxicology, 14(7), 767-790.
Hruban, R. H., Iacobuzio-Donahue, C., Wilentz, R. E., Goggins, M., & Kern, S. E. (2000). Molecular pathology of pancreatic cancer. Cancer journal (Sudbury, Mass.), 7(4), 251-258.
Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. (2015). US County Profile: Dallas County, Texas. 2301 Fifth Ave., Suite 600 Seattle, WA 98121 USA.
Jiao, L., Mitrou, P. N., Reedy, J., Graubard, B. I., Hollenbeck, A. R., Schatzkin, A., & Stolzenberg-Solomon, R. (2009). A combined healthy lifestyle score and risk of pancreatic cancer in a large cohort study. Archives of internal medicine, 169(8), 764-770.
Kadam, P., & Bhalerao, S. (2010). Sample size calculation. International journal of Ayurveda research, 1(1), 55.
Kirby, A., Gebski, V., & Keech, A. C. (2002). Determining the sample size in a clinical trial. Medical journal of Australia, 177(5), 256-257.
Klein, A. P., Brune, K. A., Petersen, G. M., Goggins, M., Tersmette, A. C., Offerhaus, G. J. A., … & Hruban, R. H. (2004). Prospective risk of pancreatic cancer in familial pancreatic cancer kindreds. Cancer Research, 64(7), 2634-2638. Chicago
Janghorban, R., Roudsari, R. L., & Taghipour, A. (2014). Skype interviewing: the new generation of online synchronous interview in qualitative research. International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being, 9.
Labilles, U. (2015).(Unpublished, Advanced Quantitative Reasoning and Analysis (RSCH – 8250H – 3), 2015 Summer Qtr. Wk11Assgn3LabillesU) Walden University, Minneapolis.
Larsson, S. C., Permert, J., Håkansson, N., Näslund, I., Bergkvist, L., & Wolk, A. (2005). Overall obesity, abdominal adiposity, diabetes and cigarette smoking in relation to the risk of pancreatic cancer in two Swedish population-based cohorts. British journal of cancer, 93(11), 1310-1315.
Lau, P. P., Dubick, M. A., Gloria, S. M., Morrill, P. R., & Geokas, M. C. (1990). Dynamic changes of pancreatic structure and function in rats treated chronically with nicotine. Toxicology and applied pharmacology, 104(3), 457-465.
Le Houezec, J. (2003). Role of nicotine pharmacokinetics in nicotine addiction and nicotine replacement therapy: a review. The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 7(9), 811-819.
Lowenfels, A. B., & Maisonneuve, P. (2003). Environmental factors and risk of pancreatic cancer. Pancreatology, 3(1), 1-8.
Lynch, S. M., & Rebbeck, T. R. (2013). Bridging the gap between biologic, individual, and macroenvironmental factors in cancer: a multilevel approach. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, 22(4), 485-495.
Lynch, S. M., Vrieling, A., Lubin, J. H., Kraft, P., Mendelsohn, J. B., Hartge, P., … & Stolzenberg-Solomon, R. Z. (2009). Cigarette smoking and pancreatic cancer: a pooled analysis from the pancreatic cancer cohort consortium. American journal of epidemiology, 170(4), 403-413.
Miller, T. Q. (1997). Statistical methods for describing temporal order in longitudinal research. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 50(10), 1155-1168.
NHIS – Adult Tobacco Use – Smoking Status Recodes. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/tobacco/tobacco_recodes.htm
Pancreatic Expression Database. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://pancreasexpression.org/
Pandol, S. J., Apte, M. V., Wilson, J. S., Gukovskaya, A. S., & Edderkaoui, M. (2012). The burning question: why is smoking a risk factor for pancreatic cancer? Pancreatology, 12(4), 344-349.
Philip, P. A. (2008). Targeted therapies for pancreatic cancer. Gastrointestinal cancer research: GCR, 2(4 Suppl 2), S16.
Prokopczyk, B., Hoffmann, D., Bologna, M., Cunningham, A. J., Trushin, N., Akerkar, S., … & El-Bayoumy, K. (2002). Identification of tobacco-derived compounds in human pancreatic juice. Chemical research in toxicology, 15(5), 677-685. Chicago.
Porta, M., Crous-Bou, M., Wark, P. A., Vineis, P., Real, F. X., Malats, N., & Kampman, E. (2009). Cigarette smoking and K-ras mutations in pancreas, lung and colorectal adenocarcinomas: etiopathogenic similarities, differences and paradoxes. Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research, 682(2), 83-93.
Prospective Ascertainment for Late Effects among Cancer … (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.mskcc.org/cancer-care/trial/12-143
Raimondi, S., Maisonneuve, P., Löhr, J. M., & Lowenfels, A. B. (2007). Early onset pancreatic cancer: evidence of a major role for smoking and genetic factors. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, 16(9), 1894-1897.
Schottenfeld, D., & Fraumeni Jr, J. F. (1982). Cancer epidemiology and prevention. Eastbourne, UK; WB Saunders Co.
Silverman, D. T., Dunn, J. A., Hoover, R. N., Schiffiman, M., Lillemoe, K. D., Schoenberg, J. B., … & Pottern, L. M. (1994). Cigarette Smoking and Pancreas Cancer: a Case—Control Study Based on Direct Interviews. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 86(20), 1510-1516.
Smith-Warner, S. A., Spiegelman, D., Ritz, J., Albanes, D., Beeson, W. L., Bernstein, L., … & Hunter, D. J. (2006). Methods for Pooling Results of Epidemiologic Studies the Pooling Project of Prospective Studies of Diet and Cancer. American journal of epidemiology, 163(11), 1053-1064.
Special Section: Pancreatic Cancer. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@research/documents/document/acspc-0388
Thomas, J. K., Kim, M. S., Balakrishnan, L., Nanjappa, V., Raju, R., Marimuthu, A., … & Pandey, A. (2014). Pancreatic cancer database: an integrative resource for pancreatic cancer. Cancer biology & therapy, 15(8), 963-967.
Validation of risk assessment scales and predictors of … (n.d.). Retrieved from http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4054635
Vincent, A., Herman, J., Schulick, R., Hruban, R. H., & Goggins, M. (2011). Pancreatic cancer. The Lancet, 378(9791), 607-620. Chicago
Vrieling, A., Bueno‐de‐Mesquita, H. B., Boshuizen, H. C., Michaud, D. S., Severinsen, M. T., Overvad, K., … & Riboli, E. (2010). Cigarette smoking, environmental tobacco smoke exposure and pancreatic cancer risk in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. International journal of cancer, 126(10), 2394-2403.
Wen, K. Y., & Gustafson, D. H. (2004). Needs assessment for cancer patients and their families. Health and quality of life outcomes, 2(1), 11.
Wilson, L. S., & Lightwood, J. M. (1999). Pancreatic cancer: total costs and utilization of health services. Journal of surgical oncology, 71(3), 171-181.
Witte, K. (1996). Predicting risk behaviors: Development and validation of a diagnostic scale. Journal of health communication, 1(4), 317-342.
Witte, K., & Allen, M. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Education & Behavior, 27(5), 591-615.
Wittel, U. A., Pandey, K. K., Andrianifahanana, M., Johansson, S. L., Cullen, D. M., Akhter, M. P., … & Batra, S. K. (2006). Chronic pancreatic inflammation induced by environmental tobacco smoke inhalation in rats. The American journal of gastroenterology, 101(1), 148-159.
The true, meaningful use of personal health records (PHR), and health information exchange (HIE) between regional sites or multi-site specialty practice could amplify coordination and efficiency for higher quality and patient-centered care. PHR and HIE have been advocated as key new components in the effective delivery of modern health care. What is the impact of PHR and HIE to healthcare system? How can sharing health information between regional sites or multi-site specialty practice bridge the communication gap? What is the role of specific-disease surveillance system in enhancing the management and delivery of quality of care? The effective use of cancer-related information aggregated from evolving health communication and information technology can help identify disease cluster such as the incidence of skin cancer in a geographic area which could improve communication strategy on a population wide basis. The processes of health communication and supportive health information technology infrastructure can influence patients’ health decisions, health-related behavior, and health outcomes. These make health communication and health information technology play an increase central role in health care delivery and public health. HINTS data could help a regional manager harness the appropriate communication channel to coordinate between facilities, and to identify barriers to the use of health information across community. Gauging the target group’s attitudes, regarding perceptions of health-relevant topics such as cancer screening will help develop more effective communication strategies. For example, a marked increase in the incidence rate of non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) based on a comprehensive surveillance system could help Mohs Micrographic Surgery facilities coordinate with dermatologists and dermato-pathologists. HINTS data can help refine information age health communication theories, and offer unique recommendations for managers, communication planners and researchers in their common aim to reduce the population cancer burden through effective, evidence-based, and patient- or public-centered communication (Hesse et al., 2006; Hesse et al., 2005; Nelson et al., 2004). The concept that captures an interactive phenomenon such as shared decision-making (SDM) utilized in concert with HINTS data recommendations will improve clinicians and patients communication. Kasper, Légaré, Scheibler & Geiger (2012) asserted that the complexity of challenges physicians have to face in critical decision making, can be alleviated by outsourcing parts of the information and decision making process to other health or medical professionals to provide optimal conditions for communication in the physician patient dyad.
Finney Rutten, L. J., Davis, T., Beckjord, E. B., Blake, K., Moser, R. P., & Hesse, B. W. (2012). Picking up the pace: changes in method and frame for the health information National Trends Survey (2011–2014). Journal of health communication, 17(8), 979-989.
Hesse, B. W., Nelson, D. E., Kreps, G. L., Croyle, R. T., Arora, N. K., Rimer, B. K., . . . Viswanath, K. (2005). Trust and sources of health information: The impact of the Internet and its implications for health care providers: Findings from the first Health Information National Trends Survey. Archives of Internal Medicine, 165, 2618–2624.
Hesse, B. W., Moser, R. P., Rutten, L. J. F., & Kreps, G. L. (2006). The health information national trends survey: research from the baseline. Journal of Health Communication, 11(S1), vii-xvi.
Kasper, J., Légaré, F., Scheibler, F., & Geiger, F. (2012). Turning signals into meaning–‘Shared decision making’meets communication theory. Health Expectations, 15(1), 3-11.
Labilles, U. (2014). The Role of Disease-specific Surveillance and Health Information Exchange (HIE) in Managing Regional Multi-site Medical Specialty Practice. (Unpublished, RSCH-8100H-2. Research Theory, Design, and Methods. 2014 Spring Qtr. WK7Assgn) Walden University, Minneapolis.
Nelson, D. E., Kreps, G. L., Hesse, B. W., Croyle, R. T., Willis, G., Arora, N. K., . . . Alden, S.
(2004). The Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS): Development, design,
and dissemination. Journal of Health Communication, 9, 443–460.
Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. (2010). Healthy People 2020. Retrieved
Scholl, I., Loon, M. K. V., Sepucha, K., Elwyn, G., Légaré, F., Härter, M., & Dirmaier, J. (2011). Measurement of shared decision making–a review of instruments. Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen, 105(4), 313-324.
Viswanath, K. (2005). Science and society: The communications revolution and cancer control. Nature Reviews Cancer, 5, 828–835.
Wen, K. Y., Kreps, G., Zhu, F., & Miller, S. (2010). Consumers’ perceptions about and use of the internet for personal health records and health information exchange: analysis of the 2007 Health Information National Trends Survey.Journal of medical Internet research, 12(4).
Fifty years ago, President Lyndon Johnson began his quest for a more just and honorable America with the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. This week, President Barack Obama joined three former Presidents delivered remarks at the Civil Rights Summit at the Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library and Museum, and acknowledged racism has hardly been erased and that government programs have not always succeeded. Let us talk about socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparity patterns in public health. What the patterns tell us? In Europe, the presence of detailed socioeconomic information in routine health data has facilitated the monitoring of socioeconomic patterns in diverse health indicators (Braveman, Cubbin, Egerter, Williams & Pamuk, 2010). This socioeconomic information gave Public health professionals and researchers the ability to compare health of socioeconomically disadvantaged population with health differences among middle-class subgroups and, potentially, comparisons with the wealthy. Braveman et al. (2010) gave emphasis on Europe’s data collection in contrast with routine the routine public health statistics in the United States. Health difference across groups defines by socioeconomic factors have been examined less frequently. It was further noted by the study that routine health reporting should examine socioeconomic and racial/ethnic disparity patterns, jointly and separately. According to Collins (2004) “race and ethnicity are poorly defined terms that serve as flawed surrogates for multiple environmental and genetic factors in disease causation, including ancestral geographic origins, socioeconomic status, education and access to health care. Research must move beyond these weak and imperfect proxy relationships to define the more proximate factors that influence health” (para. 1).
Health disparities in many instances will hardly to do with genetics, but more directly associated in socioeconomic status (SES), access to health care, education, social marginalization, discrimination, culture, stress, diet and other factors. SES is one of the strongest and most consistent predictors of morbidity and mortality. As a complex phenomenon, the impact of SES on disease makes its definition and measurement of vital importance. SES is typically measured by determining education, income, and occupation (Winkleby, Jatulis, Frank & Fortmann, 1992). The Farquhar et al study is the only U.S. study on the associations between separate SES dimensions and risk factors or disease outcomes (Winkleby et al., 1992). In the Farquhar et al. study (1985): Subjects aged 25 to 64 were drawn from the two control cities of the Stanford Five-City Project, a communitywide cardiovascular disease intervention study that contains data from four separate cross-sectional surveys, conducted from 1979 to 1986. Participants who were unemployed (n = 98), students (n = 130), or retirees (n = 146) were excluded because they had no occupation that could be ranked (Winkleby et al., 1992, p. 816). Associations between one measure of SES and one risk factor, morbidity, or mortality in other studies have found that education is more strongly associated with disease than income or occupation. One of the most complete studies of mortality differentials (Kitagawa et al., 1973) found “lower SES groups exhibited higher rates of all-cause mortality than did higher SES groups, irrespective of whether education, income, or occupation was used as the measure of SES” (p. 819). Lower levels of education are associated with hypertension, cigarette smoking, high cholesterol, cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. According to Winkleby et al., there are no SES measure that is universally valid and suitable for all populations. The study noted “if economics and time dictate that a single parameter be chosen, and if the research hypothesis does not dictate otherwise, the conclusion is that higher education, rather than income or occupation, may be the strongest and most consistent predictor of good health” (p. 819).
Abramson, J., Gofin, R., Habib, J., Pridan, H. & Gofin, J. (1982). A comparative Appraisal of measures for use in epidemiological studies. Soc Sci Med., 16,1739-1746.
Berger, M. & Leigh, J. (1989). Schooling, self-selection and health. J Hum Res. 24, 433-455.
Dyer, A., Stamler, J., Shekelle, R. & Schoenberger, J. (1976). The relationship of education to blood pressure: findings on 40,000 employed Chicagoans. Circulation. 54, 987-992.
Helmert, U., Herman, B., Joeckel, K., Greiser, E. & Madans, J. (1989). Social class and risk factors for coronary heart disease in the Federal Republic of Germany: results of the baseline survey of the German Cardiovascular Prevention Study. J Epidemiology Community Health. 43, 37-42.
Hypertension Detection and Follow-up Program Cooperative Group. Race, education and prevalence of hypertension. (1977). Am J Epidemiology. 106, 351-361.
Jacobsen, B. & Thelle, D. (1988). Risk Factors for coronary heart disease and level of eduvation. Am J Epidemiology. 127, 923-932.
Kitagawa, E. & Hauser, P. (1973). Differential mortality in the United States: Study in socioeconomic epidemiology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Labilles, U. (2013). What the Patterns Tell Us: Socioeconomic Status and Health (Unpublished, PUBH 8115-1 Wk6 Discussion, Social Behavioral and Cultural Fact in Public Health Spring Qtr.) Walden University, Minneapolis.
Millar, W. & Wigle, D. (1986). Socioeconomic disparities in risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Can Med Assoc J. 134, 127-132
Matthews, K., Kelsey, S., Meilahn, E., Kuller, L. & Wing, R.(1989). Educational attainment and behavioral and biological risk factors for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women. Am J Epidemiology, 129, 1132-1144.
Socioeconomic status and health: … preview & related info … (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.mendeley.com/catalog/socioeconomic-status-health-education-income-occupation-contribute-risk-factors-cardiovascular-disea/
Socioeconomic disparities in health in the United States … (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20147693
Pinsky, J., Leaverton, P. & Stokes, J. (1987). Predictors of good function: The Framingham study. Journal of Chronic Disease, 40, 159S-167S.
Snowden, D., Ostwald, S. & Kane, R. (1989). Education, survival and independence in elderly Catholic sisters. American Journal of Epidemiology, 130, 999-1012.
What we do and don’t know about ‘race’, ‘ethnicity’, genetics … (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/index.html?file=/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1436.html
Our nation’s most urgent health problem is the disparities in health care. There are stark disparities in health by gender and socioeconomic status. According to Davis et al. (2005), “the social and community environments affect health directly as well as indirectly by influencing behavior”(p. 2168). Which group do we put parents who have a distorted perception of their child’s body size? This phenomenon is most prevalent among low-income women and Hispanic mothers. But regardless of race or socioeconomic background, the obesity epidemic is eroding the general impression of what healthy looks like. What if obese is the new normal? If obese is the new normal, then it will be our failure as Public Health professionals to emphasize the importance of the role of parents and family to combat child obesity. Parents should play a crucial role in influencing children’s food habits and physical activity. Parental obesity may increase the risk of a child becoming obese. Wrotniak et al. (2004) is the first study to examine the incremental effects of parental weight change on child weight change while controlling for variables that influence child weight loss. The study stated that youth benefit the most from parents who lose the most weight in family-based behavioral treatments (Wrotniak et al., 2004, p. 342).
The prevalence of obesity is increasing in all pediatric age groups according to the Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Genetics, environment, metabolism, lifestyle, and eating habits are among the factors believed to play a role in the development of obesity. More than 90% of cases are idiopathic; less than 10% are associated with hormonal or genetic causes. Hirschler et al. (2008) found an association between mothers’ distorted perception of their children’s shape and eating habits and mothers’ obesity and their children’s overweight. The study provides clues for obesity prevention programs. There is a multitude of health problems that are associated with obesity. Without dealing with the new trend of maternally distorted perception of their child’s body size, health problems faced by family care physicians will continue to rise. There will be continued prevalence of obesity associated diseases such as type 2 diabetes and heart disease to hyperlipidemia, asthma, and obstructive sleep apnea. According to Friedman & Schwartz (2008), “A key concept in developing obesity-related policies is creating ‘optimal defaults’17. When there is an optimal default, the health promoting behaviors are those that come most easily, require the least effort or thought, and offer a more healthful option” (p.718).
JAMA Network | JAMA Pediatrics | Parent Weight Change as a … (n.d.). Retrieved from http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=485676
Hirschler, V., Calcagno M., Clemente A., Aranda C., Gonzalez, C. (2008, July 21). Association between school children’s overweight and maternal obesity and perception of their children’s weight status. Journal Pediatric Endocrinololgy & Metabolism. 7:641-9.
Cohen, L., Chavez, V., Chehimi, S. (2010). Achieving Health Equity and Social Justice. L. Liburd & W. Giles, Prevention is Primary (pp. 33-53). San Francisco: Jossey- Bass.
Friedman, R., & Schwartz, M. (2008). Public Policy to Prevent Childhood Obesity, and the Role of Pediatric Endocrinologists.Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology & Metabolism, 21, 717-725.
Resilience is very important in order to establish positive adaptation during marital transition. Divorce and remarriage involve a complex series of changes that can affect all aspects of family relationships. In attempts to recapture normalcy after marital separation, the feelings of hurt and pain, sadness and anger are particularly intense among children and parents. Counselling will provide the basic foundation needed and the ability to face adversity or risks, easing the challenges confronting members of families in transition. Based on the significant body of research, most children adequately adjust to dramatic changes such as emotional distress, psychological confusion, and relationship strain. The experience of children of divorce eventually meets the criteria of Garmezy’s definition of resilience “the maintenance of competent functioning despite an interfering emotionality” (1991, p. 466).
Longitudinal research on prevention shows that communication problems and destructive marital conflict are among the leading risk factors for future divorce and marital distress. The effects of divorce and marital distress caused by destructive conflict are passed on to spouses and children. According to Stanley et al. (1995), longitudinal studies have found that destructive patterns such as invalidation, withdrawal, pursuit-withdrawal and negative interpretation undermine marital happiness. The success of marriage is undermined by the active erosion of love, sexual attraction, friendship, trust, and commitment. Over 6 million children of divorce are growing up, and the study of specific mental health issue should be encouraged among current and future public health practitioners. The study will be instrumental in the development of variety of approaches that will deal with both normal and disturbed children, focusing on the immediate and future impact.
Many children hold inappropriate feelings of responsibility for their parents’ continuing relationship, and misunderstandings about the reasons for divorce. Children’s relationship to nonresidential parents, most commonly their fathers, often grow distant and inconsistent after separation and overtime. Parents should realize that the victims of marital transition are the children. A source of chronic distress for children are anger and conflict before, during and after the divorce. Single or joint parenting can become unstable as one or both parents struggle with their own burdens such as the adverse economic consequences of divorce.
Garmezy, N. (1991). Resilience in children’s adaptation to negative life events and stressed environments. Pediatric Annals, 20, 459–466.
Haggerty, R., Sherrod, L. & Garmezy, N. (1996). Parenting divorce and children’s wellbeing: A focus on resilience. Stress, Risks, and Resilience in Children and Adolescents: Processes, Mechanisms, and Interventions. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Stanley, S., Markman, H, St. Peters, M & Leber, B. (1995). Strengthening Marriages and Preventing Divorce-New Directions in Prevention Research. Family Relations, 44, 392-401.
McDermott, J. (1970). Divorce and its psychiatric sequelae in Children. Arch Gen Psychiatry, 23 (5), 421-427. : 10.1001/archpsyc.1970.01750050037006.